Comments on: Dienhart: Big Ten should put Purdue in ‘West’http://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/
BTN.com is the official Big Ten sports site of TV's Big Ten Network.Sun, 02 Aug 2015 01:26:27 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.com/By: Travishttp://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/#comment-179497
Mon, 22 Apr 2013 20:37:43 +0000http://btn.com/?p=115095#comment-179497MSU should be in the WEST and PUR/IND both in the EAST.

it’s that simple. it’s that easy. keep the MSU-MICH game annual and you’re done…

]]>By: MichiganManhttp://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/#comment-179160
Sun, 21 Apr 2013 13:39:06 +0000http://btn.com/?p=115095#comment-179160@JPatrick
I feel you man
@huskerred & @NebraskaGuy
I agree that the divisions aren’t competitively balanced, but in the coming years will Penn State have enough depth? Will Michigan State be able to improve after a disapointing 6-6 regular season and an unnoticeable recruiting class? I agree that the West division without Nebraska is the laughable. Wisconsin with the new coach is unpredictable and Northwestern’s 10 win season last year is very misleading. Iowa is still trying to recover after losing almost 3/4 their starters post the 2009 Orange Bowl game. I can see where you Nebraska fans are coming from and as a Michigan fan im sad that we wont get to play you every year. i just hope that when the B1G expands to 16 teams we’ll be moved to the West.
]]>By: huskerredhttp://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/#comment-172789
Sun, 31 Mar 2013 14:46:59 +0000http://btn.com/?p=115095#comment-172789@Alyssa

I am glad you’re a great fan of the B1G. Two years ago I was excited; not so much now-a-days. You throw out the AAU fiasco as if somehow Nebraska is a lesser academic school than the rest of the B1G. Please! Here is an article about your AAU’s beliefs http://journalstar.com/news/local/education/emails-wisconsin-and-michigan-opposed-nebraska-s-aau-membership/article_19188dda-afe7-57c8-aa2c-c1939ec5acb4.html . A much different scenario than what you stated. Understand what a land-grant state is and you begin to understand that the University had no say as to where their medical school would be built. So the AAU says since the University built their medical school fifty miles off the Lincoln home campus; that somehow or someway their medical school becomes a separate entity and is separated from the University and therefore all the research done in Omaha does not count. Really? A very stupid technicality. Not to mention the charge was lead by two B1G schools (or at least their Presidents/Chancellors).

Kind of shoots a hole in that warm and fuzzy feeling of just how the schools like to lend a helping hand to their fellow conference schools. You should have stated B1G schools love to lend a helping hand when it profits their school as well.

As of today, as a fan, I see the B1G now nearly as relevant as it once was in the colligate sports arenas. The SEC, Pac 12 and Big 12 are milestones ahead of the B1G. I’m sure I will hear about the B1G makes more revenue than any other conference; but become less relevent competitively. The confernce makes all this cash but in the same breath hear it costs too much to travel? Really?

What does the B1G have going for it today (in sports; as this about sports not academics). Well they have BTN that generates lots $$$ for them; therefore, I agree with opening up the east coast for television by allowing Maryland and Rutgers in. Football is the “cash-cow” in colligate sports, not basketball, hockey, baseball, girls volleyball etcetera. The B1G has three teams in the top six for all time most wins. Until the PSU controversy the conference had four; but due to the vacating wins on PSU recently now has dropped them to number 10 (not my judgment). In any business class across the country students are taught that companies need to highlight their strengths. By not highlighting all four dynasty schools of the B1G as “competitively balanced” the conference is not doing what is in the best interest of the conference as whole.

As far as Nebraska being in the “west” but getting cross-over games with two in the east is yet more rhetoric. Anybody who follows college football understands that cross-over games are not weighted the same as “in-division” games; henceforth, why the big three fight to keep the east as proposed. I am also sure that someone will be claiming another “raging whining Nebraska fan.” However as I have stated it is about the conference as a collective whole not just 25% of the conference as this new “east-west alignment” will.

]]>By: topher1229http://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/#comment-172572
Sat, 30 Mar 2013 22:22:32 +0000http://btn.com/?p=115095#comment-172572The only schools which benefit from this are Purdue or Indiana if they go West. Think about it………the Nebraska or Wisconsin game will be tough anually, but their protected cross over game is a cake walk, especially for Purdue. Just another dumb move for the Big 10. Let’s let everyone beat the hell out of each other and we will never have another football national champion. Highly unlikely anyone in the East can go undefeated! I guess you could think Nebraska or Wisconsin could do it, but you are almost assured 1 tough cross over game. All to change the names of Leaders and Legends and to make Penn State happy so their fans can travel???? How about figuring out how you can align teams to win national championships, not to make maps pretty!
]]>By: JPatrickhttp://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/#comment-169256
Thu, 21 Mar 2013 23:09:32 +0000http://btn.com/?p=115095#comment-169256I love that we’ll be able to play Wisconson every year, they have been a solid team since 1993, built up a solid fan base and will probably become somewhat of a dynasty themselves. That depends on their new head coach though, could be good, coud be Bill Callahan… Northwester is good competition as well but it is no Wisconsin. I don’t think the SEC would put Alabama, LSU, Florida and Georgia all in the same division, that would be just ridiculous for the conference and that is basically what the Big Ten is doing now. I guess we’ll see how it works out down the road, it might be great or not.. I love the way the conference is setup now because we get to play Michigan and Michigan State every year and I feel it is competetivly balanced fairly well. It is going to suck to lose that. Realistically, when we go to the playoff model and strength of schedule becomes a major factor, a Big Ten East conference champion will have a major advantage over Big Ten West one. All in all, I’m still glad to be in the Big Ten, as a fan, this whole realignment thing just sucks…..
]]>By: JPatrickhttp://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/#comment-169249
Thu, 21 Mar 2013 22:56:48 +0000http://btn.com/?p=115095#comment-169249@Alyssa
your comments of “The problem isn’t that the West will be weak – it’s that Nebraska needs to rise up to the level of UM and OSU in recruiting and start being a KING like OSU and UM.” I believe are incorrect. Nebraska hasn’t had recruiting problems since 1969. they had a coacing problem in Bill Callahan and that has been fixed. Please help me understand why Nebraska is not “a KING” like OSU and Michigan? are you basing that purely on recruiting scores or win/loss percentages, or bowl game appearances or championships won, or all americans or what exactly? Fact of the matter is that Ohio State, Michigan, Penn State and Nebraska are all Dynasty programs of the B1G and three of those four are in one division including Michigan State. It is majorly out of balance competetive wise. You can say all you want about ease of access to closer teams being great for fans in the West division. That has absolutely no bearing for a Nebraska fan. I gaurantee you we travel better than any fanbase in the B1G. We don’t care about distance, we care about quality of opponents and I have to imagine that Ohio State, Michigan, Michigan State and Penn State fans will say too. Somebody made a point that it’s about “Student” atheletes and having less impact on them. I don’t believe putting Michigan State in the West division and Purdue/Illinois in the East would have any impact at all. Since somebody also brought up Nebraska not bringing anything academically to the table for the B1G, Nebraska puts the ‘Student’ in ‘Student Athelete”. This taken from Huskers.com, “The Nebraska football team leads the nation (all teams, all sports, all divisions) with 104 CoSIDA Academic All-Americans, while the Nebraska volleyball team leads all women’s teams all-time across all sports with 37.The Nebraska softball team is second among all women’s programs with 29″
]]>By: Alyssahttp://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/#comment-169174
Thu, 21 Mar 2013 19:35:26 +0000http://btn.com/?p=115095#comment-169174@NebraskaGuy
I agree that playing any of the schools in the east once in 4 years is unacceptable, however giving Nebraska 1-2 protected crossovers is also unacceptable as it would mean all other schools would see those 2 schools less often. In an 8 game conference schedule you would play 6 against your division and 2 against the other division. In that scenario you would probably face 1 of OSU, PSU, MSU and MI every year and one new recruiting area school yearly. But we know the conference is moving to 9 games allowing the ability to have 1 protected cross division rival while rotating the other 6 teams over three years. It could also coincide with further expansion to 16. If set up as 2 divisions of 8, with 9 conference games, that probably means 7 division games and 2 cross division games rotated over 4 years. You could also have 4 Four team divisions where you play 3 teams in your regional division and 2 teams from all other divisions so you play twice in 4 years. Of course that may require a rule change. Whatever way it ends up, two things will definitively be clear, 1. The Big 10 will maximize exposure for Nebraska with the premium brands while helping to build Rutgers and Maryland and 2. The Big 10 will make sure all schools in the Big 10 play as much as possible as the schools in the Big 10 actually like and want to play each other.
]]>By: NebraskaGuyhttp://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/#comment-169141
Thu, 21 Mar 2013 18:20:51 +0000http://btn.com/?p=115095#comment-169141@ Joe Black
I would be 100% satisfied with that. If Nebraska had 1-2 protected crossover games vs Michigan, Ohio St, Penn St, or Michigan St then that is fine. The important thing that I have been trying to stress is that they play 1-2 of these games on an annual basis, not just every 4 years or so. They need to play these 1-2 games every year, not just on a rotating schedule.
]]>By: NebraskaGuyhttp://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/#comment-169136
Thu, 21 Mar 2013 18:15:10 +0000http://btn.com/?p=115095#comment-169136@Alyssa
McKewon doesn’t have the relationship with Osborne that Sipple does. Sipple’s office is 1 block away from Memorial Stadium in downtown Lincoln. And those are some of McKewon’s opinions in his column. The only reason that I brought up the article in which cotained Tom Osborne’s comments, is because in your preceding post you inaccurately presumed to know Osborne’s thoughts on the matter. Also, McKewon’s view on Wisconsin is biased, because he has been pushing for Nebraska to develop a rivalry with Wisconsin, because he does not take Iowa seriously as a rival to Nebraksa, even though people are trying to cram the “Nebraska vs Iowa” “rivalry” down Nebraska’s throat. He has been lobbying for Nebraska to play Wisconsin on the Friday after Thanksgiving, rather than playing Iowa on that day.

@Alyssa
“Just because you have disrespect for half the conference members does not mean that the Big 10 is lacking principles.”
Those weren’t my words. They were the words of Sipple and Osborne, that’s why they were within quotation marks. And there is a difference between “disrespect” and recognition of the fact that these schools have not set the precedent with the product they have put on the field in the past, that should lead anyone to believe that they will suddenly become a nationally relevant football program.

@Alyssa
“Commissioner Delaney mentioned three criteria for divisional alignment; geography, competitive balance and rivalries. They did not say how they were going to weigh each criterion.”

That’s interesting, because:
“Tom Osborne chuckled as he thought back to a Big Ten meeting he attended after Nebraska first became part of the conference.

The topic of discussion was division alignment.

‘They said their No. 1 principle — they always had principle — was competitive balance,’ the former Husker athletic director said Wednesday.

Big Ten officials analyzed team records over a period of several years and determined the big dogs were Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State and Nebraska.

‘They wanted to make sure those four teams played a maximum number of times,’ Osborne said.”

@Alyssa
“Last season shows that UNL could have just as easily been 3-5 in league play instead of 7-1. If that had transpired, UNL fans would have been crying that the Big 10 was being unfair.”

It didn’t happen. If Alabama wouldn’t have scored more points than Notre Dame in the national championship game, then they wouldn’t have been crowned national champions. It’s hypothetical and irrelevant. Just like if Iowa would have won more than 4 games, then they would’ve been bowl eligible this season.

This isn’t something that is just not good for Nebraska. It is something that is not good for the Big Ten West as a whole. Which in turn is not good for the Big Ten conference as a whole.

]]>By: Joe Blackhttp://btn.com/2013/03/19/dienhart-big-ten-should-put-purdue-in-west/#comment-169123
Thu, 21 Mar 2013 17:54:31 +0000http://btn.com/?p=115095#comment-169123@NebraskaGuy
And N staying in a West Division with proximate members that N fans can drive to vs. Quality programs allows them to build new rivalries in a conference that values them and emphasizes academic excellence for ALL its members.
]]>